- Feb 15, 2004
- Reaction score
- Perth, Australia
Absolutely: conservatism is an ideology. Capitalism is an ideology. Propertarianism is an ideology. Individualism is an ideology. Faith in the free market is an ideology.Walter said:What about "she" is and always has been an - almost - entirely political and quite mundane institution?
According to the Houston Chronicle, Benedict XVI is likely to continue Vatican opposition to the death penalty:Mrs Maggott said:As for the death penalty, I have noted that many Christians understand it to be a necessary adjunct of the "godly State".
Catholic leaders and scholars said Tuesday that they expect that new Pope Benedict XVI will continue his predecessor's strong opposition to the death penalty. Noting that Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was one of Pope John Paul II's key policy people, they said he was clearly supportive of the former pontiff's condemnation of a "culture of death" that includes capital punishment. The stance prompted John Paul II to write then Gov. George W. Bush asking for clemency for death row inmates.
After all, change for the sake of change has no legitimacy since the change could - and probably would - be for the worse!
Tradition for tradition's sake, similarly, has no legitimacy.
Do those advocating change mean that they want the Church to be more in line with the world?
I would say, rather, that many Catholics (and others) wish that the Church would, in some respects, "bring itself into line" with the needs and concerns of its flock.
Neither should it be a dictatorship. Pace Walter, I take this opportunity to once again pose a question I asked in the thread on Pope John Paul II.Are they looking for more "collegiality" - and by that I mean more "democracy" within the Church? Again, the Church is not a "democratic" institution.
Are democracy and the free exchange of ideas good things in themselves? If so, why are they not good for the Church? Or are they only good in certain contexts? Why those contexts, and not others?
The desire for openness and collegiality is a desire for simply that, openness and collegiality, not for the rule of the majority. Majorities--even "informed" majorities (since we're really talking about priests, bishops and theologians here)--can only tell you what is popular, not what is right. But this does not legitimate the silencing and punishment of dissenting voices. The Bill O'Reillian doctrine of "SHUT UP!" is even less a guide to truth than the will of the majority.
That does not apply in this case, since (a) nobody desires change "for the sake of change" (what a patronising strawman!), (b) those who desire change obviously perceive that on certain issues Church policy isn't working.Yet, when something is created that works, change for the sake of change can do more harm than good.
Since you appear to have no evidence that there is "another agenda" at work, why not give them the benefit of the doubt?If advocates of change are trying to realize His vision of the Church more fully, then at least any changes being considered will have Christ as their moving force. If, on the other hand, there is another agenda, then "orthodox" Christians - whatever their denomination - should be wary indeed of those changes.
And here we hit the core of the problem for so many who feel alienated and marginalised by the Church. Relevance and tolerance are "p.c." issues, and therefore, not legitimate. And those who are concerned about them are "unbelievers." If this is indeed the Church's position (and one hopes--giving Benedict XVI the benefit of the doubt--that it is not), then to those Catholics who do seek relevance, tolerance, openness, respect, and the understanding the Church is saying: "Your concerns are illegitimate, and you are unbelievers!" Can you appreciate, then, why many Catholics feel alienated by their Church?Frankly, unless you understand the meaning that the Church has for Her adherents, you will continue to fail to understand why there is so much resistance by believers to the type of "change" that is usually meant when people demand "relevance", "tolerance" and all the other "p.c." stuff that unbelievers want to see in the Church.